hellmuths top ten hands

[underthegun662]

i got his book as a christmas gift and just got done reading it. has anyone tried just playing his top ten hands? i know you probably wont crush the game playing just these ten hands but im looking for steady money. i just want to know if playing these ten hands is profitable.

[I Play 2 Ski]

no offense but there is no such thing as steady money playing poker. Your leaving alot on the table by only playing 10 hands. Read Small Stakes Holdem it is much much better.

[Sadat X]

My guess is that you'll probably play about break-even in the long run at $.5/1-$2/4 assuming you play well after the flop. You are going to leave a lot of money on the table though.

[bernie]

[ QUOTE ]
i got his book as a christmas gift

[/ QUOTE ]

Remember, it's the thought that counts. Someone bought this for you not knowing better, but their heart was in the right place.

Take care.

b

[edtost]

the most profitable thing you can do with that book is burn it and purge it from your memory. oh, and buy ssh. or wllh if you feel like being all weak-tight and stuff.

[AngryCola]

[ QUOTE ]
the most profitable thing you can do with that book is burn it and purge it from your memory.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, some of it isn't that bad. It's just the limit hold'em section that's worthless.

[Awesemo]

I know a guy who plays just AA, KK, QQ, JJ and AKs in nl $25. He plays 12 tables at once, and makes a profit. So in NL I believe it is possible.

[Greg J]

Someguy was talking about that book in chat at one of the tables I was playing a week or so ago. It's funny -- he was calling eveyone at the tables a different type of animal. He called me a lion -- I have no idea if that is good or bad. Other players were Jackels, bears, mice... there were others too. Zebras? Fvcking hyenas?

Anyway, I was all like, "wow, people read BOOKS about poker? I better find another table!" I wanted to calm down the fishies. LOL

His stats were not horrible though: his vp was a bit high at 25, but that could be a function of small sample size. PFR was 5.6, but aggression was only 1. Kinda weak, but at least he was tight. He seemed to know what he was doing to some extent at least.

[TimM]

[ QUOTE ]
the most profitable thing you can do with that book is burn it and purge it from your memory.

[/ QUOTE ]

Borders has a good return policy, you won't need a receipt to get store credit (assuming you are like me and can read a whole book without putting any wear on it). Otherwise, there is always ebay.

[edtost]

the symbolism of burning it will do wonders for his poker game. tearing it to shreads first is a nice touch, but optional.

[deacsoft]

[ QUOTE ]
the most profitable thing you can do with that book is burn it and purge it from your memory. oh, and buy ssh. or wllh if you feel like being all weak-tight and stuff.

[/ QUOTE ]

I caught a guy at my local B&M playing Hellmuth's top ten hands. Since I read the book and remembered what it said I was able to pick up on what this guy was doing and just owned him. Just because it's not recomended to play like that does not mean that the information is useless. You can learn just as much from the bad advice as from the good.

[sourbeaver]

If you're playing No-limit, you can certainly beat the Parry NL25 playing the top ten correctly, but the profits won't be astronomical unless you multi-table.

Best of luck,
Raph

[PokerGoblin]

Hellmuth's sections on some of the other games are actually somewhat worthwhile, especially for beginners. It's probably because he didn't write all of them. I think Annie Duke And Phil Gordon had a lot to do with that.

As far as the holdem section goes, take it for what its worth. He makes all sorts of references to 'reads' but gives very little advice on the subject, other than his less than inventive zoo animal references. As far as the top 10 hands goes, that's valid for early position. You can open it up a bit in multiway, unraised pots when you have position.

PG

[pho75]

I think his book does exactly what it is supposed to do. It lets a rank amature play alot of hands for real money and not get killed. It lets you develop a feel for the game that you can't get from reading ANY book.

I don't understand why so many players criticize it and call it garbage. It's like calling the book "Run Spot Run" garbage because it teaches you nothing about how to read a newspaper, you should get "How to Read a Newspaper for Dummies"; that's the best book. Yea, it might be the best book if you can aready read! Phill's book is for people who can't read, it's a primer.

I think his insights into correctly molding a new players mind are masterful. He strongly advises not even to read the more advanced sections until you've played his top ten hands for a month or more. He says YOU will know when you're ready to read on. And he's right. After about a month I was so bored with playing and winning with his top-ten I just couldn't take it anymore, so I read on. I figured out later, the reason I got bored was because I had seen everything that could happen with those top hands, many times over. And that's just what he wanted me to figure out.

He even tells you you're going to get bored and gives you something to do while you're waiting for those rare hands. To try and guess what that other players are holding. I think that's brilliant.

He makes playing your first ~5000 hands safe and simple while you develop a feel for the game and while leaning to read the board and the other players. There is also the added benifit that's it's a winning strategy, if only the games lowest limits.

Well, that's the opinion of someone who has only been playing for 4 months. Take it for what its worth.

[7ontheline]

One of the (many) reasons people deride the book for its limit hold'em section is that there are other books out there that are also aimed at a beginner which are better. I read both WLLH and Phil's book when I was starting, and WLLH is MUCH better for low-limit hold'em. Plus, a lot of Phil's advice is simplistic and wrong - he WAY overvalues Axs, for instance. Look, reading his book is better than knowing absolutely nothing, but there are a lot of better ways to play. Read SSHE if you haven't yet.

[Aceshigh7]

[ QUOTE ]
Plus, a lot of Phil's advice is simplistic and wrong - he WAY overvalues Axs, for instance

[/ QUOTE ]

From Play Poker Like the Pros:

Page 92 "There is no need to get too involved with A-x suited if you miss the flop, and no warrant for bluffing off too much money with this hand."

[magiluke]

I've never read this book, and I'm just curious as to what the top ten hands are... I could probably figure them out, but I want the official ruling, from the horses mouth (I assume there is a horse, so that's kinda a pun)

[7ontheline]

That advice is generally fine, but if memory serves he also says to raise Axs if you are the first in - not much mention of position, composition of the table, A9s vs. A2s, etc. . .I don't have the book in front of me but I'm pretty sure this is what he writes. Also, his discussion of position is extremely minimal, if I recall correctly. I still think it's a simplistic book with often inaccurate information - none of his advice is so bad that it will make you a huge loser, but I certainly think that there are other books that are as simple that have better advice.

Also, I think the top 10 hands are AA-77, AK and AQ. I think AK ranked 5th and AQ 10th? He doesn't seem to make much distinction between suited high cards and unsuited cards, which I believe is a major error in low-limit hold'em.

[Aceshigh7]

I agree with a couple of your points, I wouldn't advocate raising with Ax suited first in, also I agree there wasn't much discussion on position in the book.